Shadow Type

[yeghor]

When talking in Jungs terminology and theory, animas stands opposite to archetype of persona. Persona is the way in which we act out towards others and reply to demands of the external world, in behavioristic models(which jungian model is not) it could be called the "extraverted self". Anima naturally stands opposite to this because its the archetype of the feminine self that has been repressed and which is loaded with libido due to repression from the masculine self that needs to be maintained in order for self preservation in our society.

So INFJ is my persona...and my anima is opposite of INFJ, which is?

I don't think anima is about masculinity or feminity...it's an instinctual/archaic mechanism (is this what archetype is?) that recognizes members of the opposite sex that would have the best potential to even out the weak traits of our genes and hence would give us offspring with better chance of survival...it' related to reproduction and evolution...

So archetypes are earlier layers of the psyche's coding...that laid foundation for further and more detailed coding (so as to adapt to changing external parameters and stresses) were superceded by new layers of coding...

The deeper layers also contain inherited knowledge that comes by default...the bios/firmware/root code...

For those deeper/primitive layers to become active it takes conscious layers to shutdown or collapse somehow so that the available power/libido gets diverted to those layers...but once activated they are clumsy and/or rusty...

What does it take to collapse the conscious self then...? High loads of inferior?

So is that why inferior is called the gateway...?

But when the conscious self (i.e. the first 4 functions) collapses, shadow (anti-hero) (or the spare/contingency/backup) must take over...in the next available strongest order...i.e. functions 5-8... i.e. ENFP for INFJs...?

Personal shadow is the things that ego has repressed about the self, but have the capacity to be.

Where does this description originate from? Jung?

For example if my ego is most comfortable (because most skilled function, so i identify with it) with me using thinking and am not comfortable or skilled at all using feeling, then what my feeling function tells is often not what my ego wants to hear, so i repress that F shit and focus on thinking.

I don't think the repressing thing mentioned in personal shadow definition is about something that we do consciously but did uncosciously while growing up...

And we did not opt to keep our inferior function in that position... i.e. it's not in inferior position because we chose it to be... it's in that position because of our physiology and how we are wired individually...

So I still don't think personal shadow or what Jung coined ad shadow archetype is about the 4th function but the 5th function...i.e. our miror image, the anti-hero...

Sent via Tapatalk

 

[Zarathustra]

I don't think anima is about masculinity or feminity...it's an instinctual/archaic mechanism (is this what archetype is?) that recognizes members of the opposite sex that would have the best potential to even out the weak traits of our genes and hence would give us offspring with better chance of survival...it' related to reproduction and evolution...

So archetypes are earlier layers of the psyche's coding...that laid foundation for further and more detailed coding (so as to adapt to changing external parameters and stresses) were superceded by new layers of coding...

The deeper layers also contain inherited knowledge that comes by default...the bios/firmware/root code...

For those deeper/primitive layers to become active it takes conscious layers to shutdown or collapse somehow so that the available power/libido gets diverted to those layers...but once activated they are clumsy and/or rusty...

What does it take to collapse the conscious self then...? High loads of inferior?

So is that why inferior is called the gateway...?

But when the conscious self (i.e. the first 4 functions) collapses, shadow (anti-hero) (or the spare/contingency) must take over...in the next available strongest order...i.e. functions 5-8... i.e. ENFP for INFJs...?

Jesus Christ...

Where do you come up with this stuff?

You seem to be spinning your tires/chasing your tail/pulling stuff out of your ass, all at the same time...

 

[yeghor]

Jesus Christ...

Where do you come up with this stuff?

You seem to be spinning your tires/chasing your tail/pulling stuff out of your ass, all at the same time...

Just whatever comed to my mind

And also derived from an earliet post by [MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION]...

Sent via Tapatalk

 

[EcK]

ENTPs' inner child would be an INTJ btw....

Sent via Tapatalk

I think you re taking mbti a bit
Too seriously

Also why an intjs? Im pretty sure the intp "inner child" is not that much hidden in the first place and it
Doesnt have much to do with intj traits in my experience

 

[EcK]

Just whatever comed to my mind

And also derived from an earliet post by [MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION]...

Sent via Tapatalk

[MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION] is a barely coherent simpleton

 

[Eric B]

Isnt a decision about whether or not something is worth a thing a value(F) judgment? Why would making a value judgment give you a F inferior type vibes?

Also i find it funny that in the past when i hadnt developed my F side that much, i got stuck in worthless forum talk that just caused a headache because i just had to correct peoples faulty logic cuz faulty logic pissed me off so much.

And dont get stuck in the idea that im still doing it, because the reason for this comment is to stop you from spreading potentially harmful misinformation to people.

Ps. http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68291

I guess just shooting out "bs!" sounds very S; particularly S+T, which is "directive", and rather dry in communication, so [since you obviously go by a Ti perspective] you do seem like an ISTP in that regard.
Ne softens the T, because it allows that stuff may be true, or at least there's another way to see it so that it doesn't readily seem like total BS, but I guess you've made up your mind against anything Beebe, and once we've made up our mind against something, then the NT "structure focus" (which is like a second kind of "directiveness") comes out against it.

Anyway, for everyone else, I think this was already mentioned, but "shadow" simply means "unconscious", and any function that is unconscious falls into the "shadow". Beebe himself even said this (cited, Haas & Hunziker Building Blocks of Personality Type), and that in a newborn, all eight will be "shadow". four of the function-attitudes were made "shadow" for each type because they are simply the same first four functions, but with the attitudes reversed. Each type will tend to orient teach function in one way or the other, so the opposite way will be "shadow".
Earlier type discussion didn't discuss these as much, so it was assumed each type had no use for them. So the least conscious for an average aged person was the inferior, and this became called "the shadow" in that line of thinking, and the type with the first four reversed (and all four dichotomies opposite) became known as the "shadow type".

The type with the attitudes reversed (Which will share the same two middle letters, but opposite I/E and J/P) can also be seen just as much as the "shadow type", as can the one with all eight reversed (opposite middle two letters; same I/E and J/P.

 

[yeghor]

I think you re taking mbti a bit
Too seriously

Also why an intjs? Im pretty sure the intp "inner child" is not that much hidden in the first place and it
Doesnt have much to do with intj traits in my experience

Just trying to draw parallels and form shortcuts between the two....

Do you mean you identify internallly more with INTP type...?

Sent via Tapatalk

 

[yeghor]

[MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION] is a barely coherent simpleton

naughty bear...

Sent via Tapatalk

 

[yeghor]

....

Anyway, for everyone else, I think this was already mentioned, but "shadow" simply means "unconscious", and any function that is unconscious falls into the "shadow". Beebe himself even said this (cited, Haas & Hunziker Building Blocks of Personality Type), and that in a newborn, all eight will be "shadow". four of the function-attitudes were made "shadow" for each type because they are simply the same first four functions, but with the attitudes reversed. Each type will tend to orient teach function in one way or the other, so the opposite way will be "shadow".
Earlier type discussion didn't discuss these as much, so it was assumed each type had no use for them. So the least conscious for an average aged person was the inferior, and this became called "the shadow" in that line of thinking, and the type with the first four reversed (and all four dichotomies opposite) became known as the "shadow type".

The type with the attitudes reversed (Which will share the same two middle letters, but opposite I/E and J/P) can also be seen just as much as the "shadow type", as can the one with all eight reversed (opposite middle two letters; same I/E and J/P.

Thanks for info..


Sent via Tapatalk

 

[Zarathustra]

Anyway, for everyone else, I think this was already mentioned, but "shadow" simply means "unconscious", and any function that is unconscious falls into the "shadow". Beebe himself even said this (cited, Haas & Hunziker Building Blocks of Personality Type), and that in a newborn, all eight will be "shadow". four of the function-attitudes were made "shadow" for each type because they are simply the same first four functions, but with the attitudes reversed. Each type will tend to orient teach function in one way or the other, so the opposite way will be "shadow".

Earlier type discussion didn't discuss these as much, so it was assumed each type had no use for them. So the least conscious for an average aged person was the inferior, and this became called "the shadow" in that line of thinking, and the type with the first four reversed (and all four dichotomies opposite) became known as the "shadow type".

The type with the attitudes reversed (Which will share the same two middle letters, but opposite I/E and J/P) can also be seen just as much as the "shadow type", as can the one with all eight reversed (opposite middle two letters; same I/E and J/P.

Exactly.

This is what I intended to write when I said I would write that longer message (once I got to a computer).

Thank you, Eric.

This is what I have ultimately come to believe, and, as such, I have started using the term's anima/animus and opposing personality to describe the 3rd and 4th function block and the 5th and 6th function block, respectively. I used to call the 5th and 6th function block the shadow, then I moved to 3rd and 4th, but now you'll almost never see me not include "anima/animus" for the 3rd and 4th, and "opposing" for the 5th and 6th. Using the term shadow is too interchangeable, and could arguably be used for any of those blocks, including, as you said, the 7th and 8th, such that it would almost be better to just eschew its use when referring to a specific block of functions.

That being said, [MENTION=20531]yeghor[/MENTION], I was looking at how the Socionics people solve for that Id, Ego, Super-Ego issue, and it seems they have added a concept of the Super-Id, and have basically deemed the 1st and 2nd block as the Ego block, the 5th and 6th block as the Id block, the 3rd and 4th block as the Super-Id block, and the 7th and 8th block as the Super-Ego.

There's a bit more to it than that -- they seem switch the order of the functions in two of the latter three blocks, for some reason (i.e., 4th and 3rd, and 8th and 7th), as well as shift the order of those blocks (3rd and 4th MBTI -> 6th and 5th Socionics; 5th and 6th MBTI -> 7th and 8th Socionics; 7th and 8th MBTI -> 4th and 3rd Socionics) -- but that's at least a start.

Frankly, as I brought up before, and as you caught on for a bit, I'm not sure how I feel about calling Ni and Te the "Id" block for SFPs. I do wonder if that's more their SuperEgo, or something, kinda like you proposed. The difference being that, by one view, the Id, Ego, Super-Ego (and Super-Id, if you want to grant such a thing) would be static block positions, and, by the other, the proper block positionings for these concepts would shift, depending on what functions are in those blocks. There might be a little something to each view. Not quite sure.

 

[EcK]

Just trying to draw parallels and form shortcuts between the two....

Do you mean you identify internallly more with INTP type...?

Sent via Tapatalk

No i meant you 're wrong

 

[yeghor]

No i meant you 're wrong

Care to expand on it?

Sent via Tapatalk

 

[EcK]

Care to expand on it?

Sent via Tapatalk

Inner child doesnt have anything to do with a "shadow". The term inner child is generaly refering to " all of the sum of mental-emotional memories stored in the sub-conscious from conception thru pre-puberty."

Saying an entps inner child is "intj"ish is akin to saying entps didnt have any emotions as kids. And that's cruel.



Still though, wrong choice of term

 

[yeghor]

Inner child doesnt have anything to do with a "shadow". The term inner child is generaly refering to " all of the sum of mental-emotional memories stored in the sub-conscious from conception thru pre-puberty."

Saying an entps inner child is "intj"ish is akin to saying entps didnt have any emotiona as kids. And that's cruel.



Still though, wrong choice of term

Well did they?

Sent via Tapatalk

 

[EcK]

[MENTION=20531]yeghor[/MENTION]
Come here. I my inner child wants to kick u

 

[yeghor]

[MENTION=20531]yeghor[/MENTION]
Come here. I want to kick u

The aforementioned may mean, though, INFJs have a mushy core inside a hard crust...whereas ENTPs have a cold/hard core inside a fancy crust...

Both seem like adaptation to the environment... some animals use fancy disguises, and some use hard shells for protection...

It feels like a child to me, perhaps because it's underdeveloped in nature...

May also explain why I'd love to have an ENFP child when I get married... I feel some kind of affinity...

Sent via Tapatalk

 

[EcK]

The aforementioned may mean, though, INFJs have a mushy core inside a hard crust...whereas ENTPs have a cold/hard core around a fancy crust...

Both seem like adaptation to the environment... some animals use fancy disguises, and some use hard shells for protection...

It feels like a child to me, perhaps because it's underdeveloped in nature...

May also explain why I'd love to have an ENFP child when I get married... I feel some kind of affinity...

Sent via Tapatalk

Yeah but your wedding plans with your one and only dont have much to do with mbti
Frankly. Mbti aside, *leans in and takes a confidential tone* "entps are nice ppl inside"

I guess its a matter of terms u use. Entps are thinking and intuitive, kind of living in a world where 3 contradicting opinions can all be "true/correct" at the same time. I dont think hard is the right term. Lets go for rubbery. *overly serious look*

 

[yeghor]

Yeah but your wedding plans with your one and only dont have much to do with mbti
Frankly. Mbti aside, *leans in and takes a confidential tone* "entps are nice ppl inside"

I guess its a matter of terms u use. Entps are thinking and intuitive, kind of living in a world where 3 contradicting opinions can all be "true/correct" at the same time. I dont think hard is the right term. Lets go for rubbery. *overly serious look*

As nice as INTJs can be on the outside?

Too bad I am not a Ne-dom

Sent via Tapatalk

 

[EcK]

As nice as INTJs can be on the outside?

Too bad I am not a Ne-dom

Sent via Tapatalk

no one's perfect my dear

 

[yeghor]

no one's perfect my dear

Exactly...

Sent via Tapatalk